Fourth Amendment Commons^™

California V. Ciraolo, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Issuance Of Search Warrants By A Washington Special Inquiry Judge—State V. Neslund, 103 Wn. 2d 79, 690 P.2d 1153 (1984), Alice M. Wright

Washington Law Review

Since its creation in 1971, the Washington special inquiry judge procedure has operated virtually without constitutional challenge. However, the recent case of State v. Neslund raised the issue of whether a special inquiry judge can properly act as a neutral and detached magistrate to issue search warrants. The United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution set forth basic guarantees of privacy and fairness, including the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Generally a "reasonable" search must be accompanied by a search warrant issued upon a determination of probable cause by a neutral and detached magistrate. This …

Issuance Of Search Warrants By A Washington Special Inquiry Judge—State V. Neslund, 103 Wn. 2d 79, 690 P.2d 1153 (1984), Alice M. Wright

Washington Law Review

Since its creation in 1971, the Washington special inquiry judge procedure has operated virtually without constitutional challenge. However, the recent case of State v. Neslund raised the issue of whether a special inquiry judge can properly act as a neutral and detached magistrate to issue search warrants. The United States Constitution and the Washington State Constitution set forth basic guarantees of privacy and fairness, including the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Generally a "reasonable" search must be accompanied by a search warrant issued upon a determination of probable cause by a neutral and detached magistrate. This …

Criminal Procedure—Exclusionary Rule—No Good Faith Exception To The Arkansas Rules Of Criminal Procedure, Dale Scroggins

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Road To Exclusion Is Paved With Bad Intentions: A Bad Faith Corollary To The Good Faith Exception, Ronald J. Bacigal

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Two Models Of The Fourth Amendment, Craig M. Bradley

Michigan Law Review

Fourth amendment critics rank in rows, and it has been repeatedly pointed out that individual cases are inconsistent with each other or that whole chunks of doctrine, such as the automobile exception or the plain view exception, are either misconceived, too broad, or too narrow. But these critics all play the Court on its own field, simply arguing as tenth Justices that the doctrines should be tinkered with in different ways than the Court has done. This Article, in contrast, suggests that current fourth amendment law, complete with the constant tinkering which it necessarily entails, should be abandoned altogether. Instead, …

Rejoinder: Truth, Justice, And The American Way--Or Professor Haddad's "Hard Choices", John M. Burkoff

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

I frankly think that Professor Haddad's response to my article on pretext searches is first-rate. It is articulate; it is thoughtful and scholarly; it sharpens the issues and the analysis in this area; and, for the most part, I think his criticisms of various portions of my own work present my positions fairly and honestly. On the other hand, I think that Professor Haddad is dead wrong.

Pretextual Fourth Amendment Activity: Another Viewpoint, James B. Haddad

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Pretextual detentions, arrests, and searches pose knotty fourth amendment problems. With an air of plausibility, defense attorneys often accuse police of pretextual use of arrest warrants, search warrants, and various exceptions to the warrant requirement. Specifically, they contend that officers have utilized a particular fourth amendment doctrine to obtain certain evidence even though courts have not assigned as a reason for approving the doctrine the need to discover such evidence.

Terry Stop Or Arrest? The Washington Court Attempts A Distinction—State V. Williams, 102 Wn. 2d 733, 689 P.2d 1065 (1984), Beryl N. Simpson

Washington Law Review

In State v. Williams the Washington Supreme Court attempted to set forth specific criteria for determining when a temporary detention exceeds the bounds of a Terry stop and becomes an arrest, with the concomitant probable cause requirement. The court relied on both the fourth amendment and article 1, section 7 of the state constitution as the bases for its standards. The holding, however, is fact-specific, and the court's discussion of the permissible scope and intensity of an investigatory stop does not adequately establish guidelines for the police to apply in a future situation. Further, because the court did not ground …

The Road To Exclusion Is Paved With Bad Intentions: A Bad Faith Corollary To The Good Faith Exception, Ronald J. Bacigal

Law Faculty Publications

This Article will demonstrate that a search pursuant to a properly issued warrant may trigger application of the exclusionary rule if: (1) there is police bad faith in delaying execution of the warrant, and (2) such bad faith results in additional intrusions upon individual privacy. Although this Article is limited to a consideration of bad faith in delaying the execution of search warrants, the discussion points the way to application of the concept of bad faith to all aspects of fourth amendment jurisprudence.

Closing The "Open Fields" Question: Oliver V. United States, Brian K. Jorgensen

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Tennessee V. Garner: Fourth Amendment Limitations On A Peace Officer's Use Of Deadly Force To Effect An Arrest, Frank P. Tighe Iii

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Two Models Of The Fourth Amendment, Craig M. Bradley

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Property And Personal Privacy: Interrelationship, Abandonment And Confusion In The Path Of Judicial Review, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 847 (1985), Kenneth Mott, Lovette Mott

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Constitution And Informational Privacy, Or How So-Called Conservatives Countenance Governmental Intrustion Into A Person's Private Affairs, 18 J. Marshall L. Rev. 871 (1985), Michael P. Seng

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

New Jersey V. T.L.O.: The Fourth Amendment Goes To School, 19 J. Marshall L. Rev. 115 (1985), Timothy G. Kelly

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

United States V. Jacobsen: Expanded Private Search Doctrine Undermining Fourth Amendment Values, Kim A. Lambert

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Unreasonable Searches And Seizures Of Papers, Eric Schnapper

Articles

This article argues that the Supreme Court's original view of the history and meaning of the fourth amendment was correct: seizures of papers were condemned in eighteenth-century England without respect to the validity of any underlying warrant, and the search and seizure clause thus embodies requirements independent of the warrant clause.

Part I discusses the eighteenth-century English decisions, including Entick, and concludes that the case law of that era had two separate branches. One branch forbade general warrants and led to the adoption of the warrant clause; the other, exemplified by Entick, prohibited the seizure of certain papers …

Electronic Tracking Devices And The Fourth Amendment: Knotts, Karo, And The Questions Still Unanswered, Clifford S. Fishman

Scholarly Articles

This article will examine the Knotts and Karo decisions, analyze the unanswered questions relating to the use of electronic tracking devices, and outline legislation that might best resolve those questions and strike a proper balance between the often conflicting values of individual privacy and effective law enforcement.

Supreme Court's Treatment Of Open Fields: A Comment On Oliver And Thornton, Barbara Rockhill Edwards

Florida State University Law Review

No abstract provided.

California V. Carney, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Tennessee V. Garner, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

United States V. Sharpe, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Winston V. Lee, Lewis F. Powell Jr.

Supreme Court Case Files

No abstract provided.

Searching For The Fourth Amendment, John M.A. Dipippa

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Seizures" Typology: Classifying Detentions Of The Person To Resolve Warrant, Grounds, And Search Issues, Wayne R. Lafave

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This seizures typology constitutes a most important part of extant fourth amendment doctrine. The precision with which and perspective from which such classifications are drawn is obviously a matter of considerable interest to the police, who must in the first instance resolve these warrant, grounds, and search issues. It is also an appropriate subject of broader concern, as the shape of these categories has a critical bearing upon the effectiveness of our law enforcement processes and the extent of our protected liberty and privacy. The following comments are directed to this seizures typology.

The Pretext Search Doctrine: Now You See It, Now You Don't, John M. Burkoff

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

One can only hope, to put it bluntly, that the Supreme Court majority in Villamonte-Marquez did not mean what it seemed to have said. Indeed, there is some evidence that this is precisely the case. In the same Term Villamonte-Marquez was decided, the Court also decided Texas v. Brown. In Brown, the Supreme Court continued to recognize and respond to the problem of pretext searches. In other words, the Court still acts as if the pretext search doctrine remains vital, despite the apparent body blow delivered to it in Scott and Villamonte-Marquez. The remainder of this Article …

Introduction: Trends And Developments With Respect To That Amendment 'Central To Enjoyment Of Other Guarantees Of The Bill Of Rights', Yale Kamisar

Articles

Seventy years ago, in the famous Weeks case,' the Supreme Court evoked a storm of controversy by promulgating the federal exclusionary rule. When, a half-century later, in the landmark Mapp case,2 the Court extended the Weeks rule to state criminal proceedings, at least one experienced observer assumed that the controversy "today finds its end." 3 But as we all know now, Mapp only intensified the controversy. Indeed, in recent years spirited debates over proposals to modify the exclusionary rule or to scrap it entirely have filled the air - and the law reviews.'

Probable Cause And Common Sense: A Reply To The Critics Of Illinois V. Gates, Joseph D. Grano

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I of this article reviews Gates's actual holding. Although one can view much of the Court's more interesting discussion of the two-pronged test as dicta, the majority and dissenters clearly did not regard it as such. The majority and dissenters disagreed, however, not only over the appropriate hearsay test but, more fundamentally, over the nature of probable cause itself. I will argue that one must resolve this more basic disagreement before properly addressing the hearsay issue.

Part II examines probable cause from an historical perspective. In this part, I attempt to demonstrate that both the English common law …

The Applicability Of Miranda Warnings To Non-Felony Offenses: Is The Proper Standard "Custodial Interrogation" Or "Severity Of The Offense"?, Kenneth W. Gaul

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

This Note argues that the proper standard for determining the necessity of the Miranda warnings for any offense is the existence of custodial interrogation. When interrogation for non-felony offenses takes place in a custodial atmosphere, Miranda warnings should be required, as they are for more serious offenses. Part I summarizes the two basic approaches taken by courts that have confronted the question of the applicability of the Miranda warnings to non-felony offenses. Part Ill argues that neither the rationale for the Miranda doctrine nor the roots of the fifth amendment support a distinction based on the severity of the offense …